About your Search

20121115
20121115
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
david petraeus to resign as director of the cia. barbara starr joins us from the pentagon. not just petraeus but other cases that i guess have precipitated panetta's response. right? >> reporter: absolutely, fredericka. of course, general john allen, the commander in afghanistan under review, investigation for sending potentially inappropriate e-mails, two other four-stars just went through investigations for irregularities in the travel and expense accounts. a number of lesser if there's such a thing of generals and admirals also in recent months under investigation for variety of things, so panetta's issued an order saying that he wants the joint chiefs of staffs to look at ethic training for senior nil tear leaders. what are we talking about here? basically, you know, don't cheat on your wife. don't cheat on your taxes. don't go get too drunk in public. you know? and don't cheat on your expense account. you think it's the blinding flash of the obvious, wouldn't you? but we have talked to a number of officials say panetta is just very aware of the public perception right now and h
to war with each other. the state department, the pentagon and the cia and the question who is responsible for what happened that night in libya for preventing and failing to prevent what happened. and the report is that general petraeus wanted to get out there aggressively in defense of the cia and ultimately did by release that time line and the intel officials were not too happy with petraeus and the suggestion is suddenly when they became unhappy about what he started to do on libya to defend the cia, suddenly his affair was a deal breaker. suddenly that went up to the upper etch lons and clapper told him he needed to resign and petraeus wanted to keep his job but did what his boss told him to do which was resign. does that make sense to you? is that feasible? >> you are not the on person saying it. megyn: i'm not saying it at all. the "wall street journal" is saying it. >> charles krauthammer made a similar statement. maybe the thing that was being held as the sword of damocles was the preknowledge of this. i don't know. that's all speculation. here is the point i was t
, if there was a seven-hour gun battle for that consulate, that's not fast enough for the pentagon to react. it just isn't. i've been in those situations. you have to have the pieces in place before you can respond. i've heard the stories about laser designators and they could have called in air support. listen, to use military forces inside an independent country, a volatile one at that, takes, you know, weeks of planning in advance. somebody did drop the ball. but i just don't believe the thing that the military could have responded, could have sent f-16s down there to hit the targets. it takes a long time to set that up. >> when all is said and done, do we have the case of a watergate style cover-up here or do we just need the answers to some questions? >> david petraeus has those answers. he is out of the cia now. if he sits down and tells the truth as he knows it, doesn't shave off the edges, we will get our answers. and congress will, too. we take it from the next step. but somebody, i'm sorry, should be fired for benghazi. should have closed that place down. >> robert baer, former cia operative.
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)